If she was writing down what the cops wanted her to write down, her story would comport with Mangum's and there would be no "crock" statement.
Anyway, I don't appreciate you making stuff up. Maybe you find it amusing, but when I reply to somebody I tell the truth as I understand it and don't try to make my point through lies.
We don't know what time im said she left the bathroom or if she was there when Mangum made her phone call. Kim said that when Mangum was put in the car, she wanted to go back in because there was more money to be made. That's pretty damning, and not something the cops woulod want her to write down.
Anyway, I don't appreciate your methods of discussion, so I think this is over, as well as any future discussions between us. But thanks for letting me know that exchange with Liefong was all BS. Now I'm not worried anymore about Kim's testimony.
See ya'.
I don't appreciate my parody being called a lie... From you're statement above as well as you not knowing my earlier post was parody you obviously don't know as much about this case as I thought.
There was not a "crock" statement in Kim's written document, neither was there a 5 minutes statement. But I thought you would have known that... Linwood...